Comments about ‘What others say: Political cooperation’

It is great to see that some politicians see that they can do more for those
they are elected to serve by on occasion reaching across the isle and partnering
with the other side to get things done...good for Christie. Lets see of the
Governor of Oklahoma has the same courage.. and put the people of her state
ahead of petty partisanship. I would hope so.

Then again, the dear
senator from Oklahoma questioned if the government could afford to render aid
when it was being sent to the Northeast.... I wonder if his opinion has change
now that the needs hits home.

Such a breath of fresh air!Feeling like the time machine has taken me
back. Such concepts being presented here!Working together, foregoing egos,
forgetting the power grabbing concept, helping mankind, considering their
constituents.......Can't go on, feeling like I'm going to cry.

Christie is burning bridges with conservatives. Basically being seen slapping
hands with the devil is no way to win the confidence of the masses. I am
thinking that most people have no idea where Christie stands politically
anymore. You have to be hot or cold - being luke warm you get thrown out with
the dirty dish water.

The first rule of politics is to get somebody else to pay for everything.
Obama's mantra has been to "give" health-care and cell-phones and
birth-control to everyone except the "rich guy" and then to have the
"rich guy" pay for it. New Jersey's governor knew that if he told
the citizens of his State to roll up their sleeves, to get to work and to
clean-up and fix-up, that he would be out of a job. He knew that getting
someone in Mississippi or Nevada or Utah to foot his State's
clean-up/fix-up cost would make him a hero. His love of office was greater than
his desire to inspire his people to grow up and face hardship. Obama was all
too happy to oblige.

Do you think that either of them care that
they took an opportunity away from the people of New Jersey to do something
great even as they patted those poor people on the head, uttering, "There,
there, don't worry. Uncle Sam will take care of you - in exchange for your
dignity and for your freedom."

My recollection during the presidential campaign was that Romney's national
and select state poll numbers were trending favorably for him until Hurricane
Sandy devastated New Jersey and New York. As a Romney supporter I was perplexed
by Gov. Christie's warmly extended hand and words towards Obama at this
critical time in the campaign.

In hindsight, after the emotions of
the campaign have subsided, I am grateful to see a display of bipartisanship to
solve problems. We need more of this.

I understand that
"necessity is the mother of invention". Obama needed Christie, and
Christie needed Obama for their respective campaigns. They both did what was
necessary to solidify their political careers. But I also believe that both did
the right thing for the people of New Jersey. It isn't New Jersey's
fault that the hurricane devastated them. Nor is it only their fault that our
government is broke such that the $billions of aid adds to our tragic debt. It
was right to help them.

We need more bipartisanship. We need
resolution of serious problems facing our nation: social security &
medicare solvency, overhaul of the tax code, balancing the budget,
immigration...to name a few.

Nicely said David... I was wondering when the adults would return to the
conversation, and your comments are a welcome voice of reason.

At
some point, partisan ship needs to stop when people are hurting. To have made
the people of a state suffer needlessly to solely make political points would
have been most unthinkable, and near immoral.

Thankfully the DN
denied my emotional response to some very ..... well lets just say some
comments that didn't show the same level of maturity that as David's
did. I almost showed off my less than mature side... but the moderators saved
me from myself.

There are times when the people of this country
should come before political gamesmanship. That is why some of the comments
only a few months ago by elected national representatives from the very states
that find themselves in dire need seem to ring so morally bankrupt. Never -
ever - should partisanship be placed before helping out those in need. Save the
grandstanding for after the red cross has gone home.

"There are times when the people of this country should come before
political gamesmanship. "

Yup. And that time is today, yesterday
and tomorrow.

I cannot believe that Christie is in hot water with the
GOP for doing his job. The problem is that some people who call
themselves "patriots" would rather our politicians be partisan in any
and every issue than to just do whats best for America.

Both parties
do good and bad things. Both R and D legislators do good and bad things.

Note to Mike Richards. Most Americans believe that the phrase "one nation
under God" means I've got your back friend. We're in this
together. If we pool our assets and efforts I can help you when you need it and
you can help me when I need it. And just a guess but I'll bet those
thousands of people who spent hundreds of hours cleaning up and physically
rebuilding don't think they have missed an opportunity to do something
great, they just needed a little help. Yea, and I know, I know, show me where
in the constitution it says we can send tax dollars collected in Utah to a
starving and freezing child in New Jersey?

The Federal Government pays $3.6 BILLION annually to Hill Air
Force Base, or about $1,000 for every man, woman and child living in Utah. That
money is authorized by the Constitution for DEFENSE. It is not welfare. Take
that figure out of the equation and then tell us how much Utah receives. In
case you don't know it, Utah is noted for having a willing and able
workforce. Our symbol is the Beehive. We don't lounge around and wait for
others to come clean up our homes and businesses. We actively export
humanitarian aid all over the world.

After Katrina, one newspaper
reported that two churches bused in thousands of volunteers to assist with the
cleanup and that those two churches air-lifted and delivered by truck, food,
clothing and humanitarian supplies. Those two churches were the Church of Jesus
Christ of Latter-day Saints and the Mormons.

When the Teton Dam burst
in Idaho, the LDS people were counciled to NOT accept government aid. We
exported volunteers for months to assist the flood victims.

Don't lecture the people of Utah about work ethic and about living
charitable lives.

Utah, like most states is taking federal money for schools, roads, public parks,
military bases, EPA cleanup funds and the big HUGE welfare going to Utah
farmers. You may have been counseled, but you're not doing it.

My impression from these posts is that many of you are probably Democrat and
Obama supporters. That being said, just remember that it was the Democrats and
Obama that did not want to work with the Republicans at all when passing
Obamacare. Political compromise is a two way street, not just the Republicans
giving in to Democrats, which is what it always seems to be. And Mitt Romney
was well known for working with the Democrats when he was governor of MA. That
didn't get him much sway with the Democrats when he ran for President. So,
Christie is not likely going to get much Democrat support should he run for
President. So, politically, what is the upside for Christie?

Christie's actions are what lead me to think that -- despite his obvious
liabilities of weight and possibly temperament -- he has a good chance for
president in 2016. He is serious on the fiscal issues -- witness his
head-to-heads with Democrats and unions on the budget -- and moderate on social
issues. That combination satisfies a lot of people. The Republican party is
fading, it seems, and the Democrats are sinking in a swamp of corruption and
identity politics. It is hard to say which is worse. If Christie could somehow
get nominated -- in an environment which certainly tries to take out people like
him -- he could win. It's time we had someone serious in the White House,
for a change.

"The Federal Government pays $3.6 BILLION annually to Hill Air Force Base,
or about $1,000 for every man, woman and child living in Utah. That money is
authorized by the Constitution for DEFENSE. It is not welfare. "

Real easy Mike Richards... (what, you think Utah is the only state with a
large military base on it.... ) North Carolina has a far larger military
presence than does Utah... and yet... it is a net contributor... not a taker
like Utah. And do you really believe there is only two kinds of federal spend -
defense (constitutional in your eyes), and everything else is welfare
(unconstitutional in your eyes... if I read you correctly).

For 2009
- the last year total numbers are in Utah received 20.7 Billion in federal
dollars, of which 3.8 of that was defense related. That means a little over 81%
of federal dollars were spent on what you call welfare. Now this might shock
you... but this is just a percentage points different than New Jersey. 91% of
federal money spent in Idaho is none defense - and it is one of the per capita
highest takers states out there.

Impeach Obama?? What are you talking about?? There has
been no such action taken? Are you still smarting from when they did impeach
Clinton?

Fillabustered legislation 300 times?? Really. Has Congress
even been in session that many days to do that? Some of your stats seem right
out of Move on or Huffington Post. In reality, you likely would not vote for
Christie. Nor would you have voted for Reagan.

So Republicans
don't need to try for your vote. They need their own base to come out,
which they did not for Romney, as he got less votes than Mccain, and they need
enough of the center, which determines all Presidential elections.